<DrumBeat: March 3, 2008The Oil DrumThe real lessons of Cuba and peak oil>

113 comments on Bread and Oil: Rising Food Prices and the Middle East

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

George Asebius on March 3, 2008 - 2:37pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I sincerely doubt many people are going to be allowed to starve. We are not talking war here.

But food aid used as part of foreign policy.....yes, that is likely.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
CrystalRadio on March 3, 2008 - 4:40pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I also doubt very very much that you personally would allow them to starve if you could help it, but there seems to be a disconnection when we are able to allow our governments to do exactly that for political purposes. You can look to the aftermath of the first Gulf war and the embargo, according to the following from Wiki:

The estimate from the study indicates more than 46,900 children died between January and August 1991.[40] A 1998 UNICEF report found that the sanctions resulted in an increase to 90,000 deaths per year.

Withholding food or essentials for political reasons in time of peace is in my opinion as, or more reprehensible, than it would be in time of war.

BTW you did not respond to my first point, not that you are required to, but in the heat of the moment you might have overlooked it?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
George Asebius on March 3, 2008 - 5:17pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Chrystal, an embargo is rather extreme and, for all intents and purposes, an act of war.

I suspect the West could get a lot of mileage out of its food exports edge, if necessary, without resorting to embargo.

>>BTW you did not respond to my first point...

I think your point was that the Americans are extremists. In some ways, maybe, but I can't see how the world food situation gives us means to pressure them!

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Jack on March 3, 2008 - 10:03pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Using Crystal Radio's definition of embargos and war crimes, it sounds like OPEC should be the target of his/her anger.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
CrystalRadio on March 4, 2008 - 12:03am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Sorry Jack, you are way over my head with that. I know you must be, as all I can manage to decipher out of it is that OPEC is starving the west by not supplying needed oil to run their children ... all the little SuV's and Hummers?
NO! NO! that way lies madness ... must rest my head now, go to bed, dream of bunnies and butterflies...nite, nite :)

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Jack on March 4, 2008 - 5:51am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

OPEC does not supply oil exclusively to the US or the West. People do die from lack of energy.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
CrystalRadio on March 3, 2008 - 11:57pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I think your point was that the Americans are extremists. In some ways, maybe, but I can't see how the world food situation gives us means to pressure them!

Not extremists but understanably a bit blind, just like Canadians are in not opposing a war of aggression in Afghanistan.

About agressive war, I have this about Nuremburg ( though not what I was looking for which was a more complete definition of aggressive war, I am surprised I cant even find the complete wording of the UN charter which as I remember made no bones about the business of war).

: The Nürnberg Tribunal condemned a war of aggression in the strongest terms: "To initiate a war of aggression . . . is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." It held individuals accountable for "crimes against peace", defined as the "planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing...." When the United Nations General Assembly unanimously affirmed the Nürnberg principles in 1946, it affirmed the principle of individual accountability for such crimes.

-----------------------
On this:

I suspect the West could get a lot of mileage out of its food exports edge, if necessary, without resorting to embargo.

The problem I see here is that it still involves the innocent along with those that are considered guilty, not exactly cricket eh? (but then cricket isn't what it was since it was played in Iraq, I think:P

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.